While conducting a post-maintenance test flight in visual flight rules conditions, the private pilot of the multi-engine airplane reported an oil leak to air traffic control. The controller provided vectors for the pilot to enter a right base leg for a landing to the south at the nearest airport, about seven miles away.
The pilot turned toward the airport but indicated that he did not have the airport in sight. Further, while maneuvering toward the airport, he reported that the engine was “dead,” and he still did not see the airport.
The final radar data point recorded the Cessna 421C’s position about 3.5 miles west-northwest of the approach end of the runway. The wreckage site was in Huntsville, Texas, about four miles northeast of the runway, indicating that the pilot flew past the airport rather than turning onto a final approach for landing. The pilot died in the crash.
The reason that the pilot did not see the runway during the approach to the alternate airport, given that the airplane was operating in visual conditions and the controller was issuing guidance information, could not be determined. Regardless, the pilot did not execute a precautionary landing in a timely manner and lost control of the airplane.
Examination of the airplane’s left engine revealed that the No. 2 connecting rod was broken. The connecting rod bearings exhibited signs of heat distress and discoloration consistent with a lack of lubrication. The engine’s oil pump was intact, and the gears were wet with oil. Based on the available evidence, the engine failure was the result of oil starvation, however examination could not identify the reason for the starvation.
Probable cause: The pilot’s failure to identify the alternate runway, to perform a timely precautionary landing, and to maintain airplane control. Contributing to the accident was the failure of the left engine due to oil starvation for reasons that could not be determined based on the postaccident examination.
NTSB Identification: CEN17FA167
This April 2017 accident report is provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Published as an educational tool, it is intended to help pilots learn from the misfortunes of others.
It doesn’t sound like this pilot was well versed on single engine operation on a light twin airplane. It sounds like he did nothing right. That’s why it’s so important to know how your airplane fly’s and performs on single engine, most do it one time and then it’s forgotten once they get their twin rating..So sad..
Agreed! trimming the out of alignment aerodynamic forces in a single engine configuration needs priority action first, and not listening to an ATC who cannot provide any real assistance anyway. Trim— stabilize flight—— then think on the plan of action——-and resume flying the airplane.
life suddenly becomes so much easier when you trim the airplane.
Agree heartily…..he could have used a little help….like a progressive during taxi
– It’s called when the #*it hits the fan folks. We all like to think we will be perfect and totally rational when our life is in imminent danger, but truth is, when that happens all bets are off for all of us. Until you’ve been there, you just don’t know. There is only one Scully.
– It has always gripes me how these reports read: the crash was caused by, “this, that and whatnot” …all related to the pilots performance. The fact is, no oil starvation, no crash, regardless of pilot performance. Is it just me or do others feel the same?
Lotta’ details missing here.
BESIDES possible controller error?
A slow twin rapidly losing altitude should be vectored DIRECTLY to the airport and not to some squared off right base leg approach. Besides, how ya’ gonna’ find a strange airport 3 miles away at 150 feet? LUCK?
Also, what was the maintenance performed prior to the “postmaintenance test flight”??
Unless the engine was completely melted from post crash fire, there is NO reason why the cause of oil starvation could not be determined by a COMPENTENT engine shop if the examiner chose to expend reasonable resources; unless, of course, it was to protect the guilty.
Yeah, blame the dead guy; he can’t talk back!
Jerry King
Not the pilots failure…the engines failure. A chunk of iron will fall from the sky without power. You can’t pay me to fly a plane with no chute.
Pilot with emergency situation, in radar contact and talking to controller can’t get a heads up when he’s passing his destination….pretty sad situation
It is weird that the pilot had the presence of mind to radio that he has engine problems, and acknowledged the advise given to him for vectors to land at the closest runway. But he crashed at another point after flying some distance.
So he panicked when something else occupied his mind? Maybe a control situation, Did he feather the dead engine? Or did he continue to propel the dying engine and lose control of the situation even further and get into the total panic mode like freezing his mind and physical actions, as is known to happen in single pilot situations, when there is too much workload?
When the mind freezes. there is no response , because there is no clear thinking taking place. You see, but you don’t comprehend. You get a mental block, and in the absence of external factors, you just FREEZE!
Anjan Muhury.
I have not had a failed engine to blame for not seeing an airport. In fact, it was an airport where I had been based at one time with a hangar on the field — and I could see the planes in the pattern, but I couldn’t make out the airport itself!!
So, this is the real deal with the critical engine out and this guy is rather busy, probably trying to maintain Vsse.
And the controller should KNOW and should have declared for this pilot that this is an emergency.
So the pilot just can’t make out that runway and flies past it and gets too slow, and from what I was reading, pulled power on the running engine — I would suspect to handle a Vmc issue and still lost control of it.
I really don’t think this guy froze. I think that ATC shares responsibility in this even though the NTSB didn’t say that.